Abstract

Fraud is increasing with frequency and severity. In this paper, I explore the assertion of the fraud triangle as a useful practitioner framework employed to combat fraud. This paper is anchored through Fairclough's critical discourse theory, and is supported with evidence from three accounting fraud cases. The findings indicate that the Association of Certified Fraud Examiner's (ACFE) perpetuates a discourse that presents a restricted version of fraud. Fraud is a multifaceted phenomenon, whose contextual factors may not fit into a particular framework. Consequently, the fraud triangle should not be seen as a sufficiently reliable model for antifraud professionals.